chuck
Posts: 28
Joined: 5/18/2001
From: Melbourne Australia
Status: offline
|
I've just reread Shelby Foote's excellent history, and it strikes me the leadership model seems a little oversimplified. I've also been poking around with the old 'Sumter to Appomattox' game, which seems to have been the first serious attempt to tackle this in a game.
Someone has already noted that ratings should take rank into account; there is no question that there were many cases of leaders promoted past (sometimes way past) their ability--e.g. Hood, Hooker.
I'm not sure a leader's rating should be fixed for the whole game either. For instance, R.E. Lee was increasingly affected by a heart condition in the last 12 months of the war. For that matter, his first outing in W. Virginia wasn't successful at all. Pickett never really recovered from the heartbreak at Gettysburg. Ewell became a different chap after he got married. There should be some allowance for leader events (health, personal, animosity towards one or more colleagues or the High Command, battlefield defeat) that affect their ratings.
Some leaders also profited from more experience, while many did not. Sheridan's first couple of outings were not all that auspicious, and his aggressiveness was sometimes counterproductive. There is no doubt that Grant learned a lot over the four years. Meade seems to have just about gotten the hang of army command under Grant that eluded him in 1863.
If you wanted to get really tricky, you could also think about leadership teams and how leaders interact with each other: the obvious and outstanding teams being R.E.Lee/Jackson/Longstreet/Hill and Grant/Sherman/Sheridan. A teamwork rating being low, might recommend a leader for detached operations, but make it more difficult to use him in a larger operation, where he will cause trouble and dissension regardless of ability. E.g.: Beauregard.
These teams cemented over time, and represented a harmonious command structure, not easily replaced if one or more elements are changed. This certainly happened to the Army of Northern Virginia as the 'system fed on itself', breaking up the team. It was never achieved in the Army of Tenessee, whose commanders spent more time attacking each other and Davis.
A final thought: I reckon if you don't play with leaders completely randomised, you don't capture the period at all. The only way is to put your head in the same bag as Lincoln and Davis; otherwise it's just too easy.
Chuck
"I can't spare this man; he fights". A. Lincoln
_____________________________
Nothing kills like overkill...
|
Printable Version
Leadership Model - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread